"Circumcision Produces These Irreversible
Changes"

And Other Statements About

the Physical Effects of Circumcision

"The male foreskin has three important
physiological functions that circumcision irreversibly
destroys." ("Structure and Function of Male and
Female Genitalia; The Circumcision Procedure:
Risks vs. Benefits," by George Denniston, MD,
Syllabus of Abstracts of the Second International
Symposium on Circumcision, San Francisco, 1991)

"During a boy's growth, the foreskin protects
the sensitive glans. Normally the surface of the glans
is composed of a smooth, glistening membrane only a
few cells in thickness. The surface cells are alive, and
naked nerve-endings are distributed among these cells.
After circumcision, when the glans is exposed to soiled
diapers and rough clothing, this membrane becomes 10
times thicker, and the free nerve-endings disappear.
The surface becomes covered with an adherent layer
of dead cells, rough, dry, and insensitive." (The
Unkindest Cut of All, by John M. Foley, MD, Fact,
July 1966)

"The foreskin protects the glans from contact
with rough surfaces, and enables it to retain a
pronounced sensitivity. The slightest touch upon the
head by anything not lubricated, even the finger,
creates a sharp feeling of tenderness similar to that
experienced when a piece of raw flesh is exposed.
"Before circumcision, the glans is a deep
pink, much as the organ of any male animal when
upon erection it protrudes from its sheath. Also it is
kept moist by the foreskin in the same manner that
the vulva of the female is lubricated by the small lips.
"The man with a foreskin ... experiences an intensity
of pleasure in intercourse that
does not extend to the circumcised ... before
circumcision the head of the penis is pink, and tender
to the touch. Following the operation it rapidly
becomes grayish and so insensitive that sandpaper can
be rubbed against it without creating the slightest
pain. Since circumcision exposes the bare glans by
necessitating the amputation of all the protective skin,
constant contact, then, with clothing quickly reduces
its sensitivity to that of ordinary epidermis. This is the
effect of circumcision upon the sexual center of the
male body." (Modern Sex Techniques, by Robert
Street, Lancer Books, 1966)

"The foreskin shields the glans; with
circumcision, this protection is lost." (Care of the
Uncircumcised Penis, American Academy of
Pediatrics, 1984)

"Depending on the amount of skin cut off, circumcision robs
a male of as much as 80 percent or more or his penile skin. . . .
Circumcision desensitizes the penis radically. Foreskin
amputation means severing the rich nerve network and all the
nerve receptors in the foreskin itself ... The amputation of
so much penile skin permanently immobilizes whatever skin
remains, preventing it from gliding freely over the shaft and
glans ... Circumcision alters the appearance of this penis
drastically. It permanently externalizes the glans, normally an
internal organ. Circumcision leaves a large circumferential
surgical scar on the penile shaft. Because circumcision usually
necessitates tearing the foreskin from the glans, pieces of the
glans may be torn off, too, leaving it pitted and scarred. Shreds
of foreskin may adhere to the raw glans, forming tags and bridges
of dangling, displaced skin ... Circumcision interrupts the
normal circulation of blood throughout the penile skin system and
glans. The blood flowing into major penile arteries is obstructed
by the line of scar tissue at the point of incision, creating
backflow instead of feeding the branches and capillary networks
beyond the scar ... Recent studies published in leading
medical journals have reported that circumcision has long-lasting
detrimental effects on the developing brain, adversely altering
the brain's perception centers ... Medical journals have
published numerous accounts of babies who have had part or all of
their glans cut off while they were being circumcised. Other
fully conscious, unanesthetized babies have had their entire
penis burned off with an electrocautery gun. The September 1989
Journal of Urology published an account of four such
cases. The article described the sex-change operation as
"feminizing genitoplasty," performed on these babies in an
attempt to change them into girls. The March 1997 Archives of
Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine described one young
person's horror on learning that "she" had been born a normal
male but that a circumciser had burned his penis off when he was
a baby." (Where Is My Foreskin? The Case Against Circumcision,
by Paul M. Fleiss, MD. Mothering Magazine, Fall 1997)